Pueblo D60 challenges PSAS claims

Jon Pompia Education, health, Colorado State Fair @Jpompia

Friday

Apr 24, 2020 at 4:53 PM

In a filing asking the state board of education to revoke Pueblo School District 60’s exclusive chartering authority, counsel for Pueblo School for Arts and Sciences levied several condemnatory allegations.

Among the claims: That the district "has shown its contempt for PSAS by frivolously investigating possible revocation" and has unlawfully withheld nearly $70,000 from PSAS’ per-pupil revenue while failing to assist the school with its long-term facilities goals.

The filing comes on the heels of complaints against the PSAS board and administrative leaders expressed by school parents before the D60 board.

After the most recent presentation of grievances, board member Dennis Maes asked the D60 board attorney for advisement regarding the grounds for charter revocation and the steps that would need to be taken should that process be pursued by the board.

"I don’t want to make any decisions or draw any conclusions," he said. "What I’m hearing, at least peripherally right now, is a matter of great concern. And we do, as a board and authorizer, have certain responsibilities, and I want to make sure that this board is providing the responsible oversight it’s supposed to be exercising."

This week, the district responded to the PSAS filing and the allegations contained within.

"We serve a diverse population of over 16,000 students at 33 schools, including three charter schools," reads a D60 board statement given to The Pueblo Chieftain. "Our district, in fact, was one of the first in Colorado to authorize a charter school when authorizing such schools became possible through the Colorado Charter Schools Act.

"Since then, the district has always valued and enjoys a positive working relationship with its charter schools, including with Pueblo School for Arts and Sciences."

When originally approached by PSAS parents, the district encouraged them to share their concerns directly with PSAS counsel.

"These were serious allegations about the school, ranging from lack of transparency in its governance to financial mismanagement to possible employment discrimination," the statement declares. "The parents attempted to address their concerns with PSAS directly, but apparently to no avail.

"Many of those parents then came to the D60 board pleading for help."

"Ultimately, we need your help. You are the charter school authorizer for PSAS," one parent told the board. "Please get involved now before the interim director, the board, and the business manager do irreparable harm to our reputation, our finances and more importantly, our student body."

The district says it provided a detailed summary of the parents’ "deeply troubling" allegations to PSAS counsel.

In the weeks that followed, the district’s charter school liaison, Tom Weston, submitted questions to the school concerning the allegations to determine if the claims have merit — and if so, how best to resolve them.

"PSAS and its counsel apparently misinterpreted this inquiry as laying the groundwork for revoking its charter: an extraordinary remedy the district has never done, would never do absent clear and present grounds, and has no intention of doing based on the facts before it," according to the district statement.

And without conferring with district leadership, the D60 board or its counsel, PSAS "jumped the gun," in the district's words, and filed the request with the state board of education.

This action, the district maintains, "is an extreme punishment reserved for those rare cases when a school district shows a clear pattern of unfair behavior toward its charter schools."

The district contends it has always treated all charter schools under its authority fairly.

"We are deeply offended and perplexed that one of our longest-standing charter partners would allege otherwise, especially without first coming to us and attempting to resolve the dispute before lodging unsubstantiated claims publicly," reads the statement.

As directed by the state board of education, D60 has until May 1 to respond in writing to the revocation request.

"We intend to respond fully in due course and hope the state board will, after considering the truth, determine there is no basis to revoke the district’s exclusive chartering authority," the statement asserts.

"We will, however, use this opportunity to publicly clear the record on PSAS’s allegations, all of which are either false or grossly misleading."

The district denies that it is investigating or pursuing charter revocation, saying that the board wanted answers from the school based on parents’ concerns.

"The district simply wanted to know if the complaints had merit and, if so, how to address them amicably," the statement offers.

As for the claim of refusing to help PSAS with facility needs, the district refers to it as "pure fiction."

"The district has allowed PSAS to occupy district-owned buildings rent-free for years, and has worked productively with the school whenever its facility needs have changed," the statement explains, adding that $1 million in bond funds have been allocated to PSAS to address high-priority needs.

Also challenged is the assertion that the district withheld $70,000 in per-pupil funding.

"For two years, the district overpaid the school in per-pupil funding based on an honest mistake," according to the statement. "The district attempted to recoup the funds, which PSAS refused, and the parties ended up settling the matter amicably and to PSAS’s financial benefit."

Another claim the district denies is that it "refused to include the school’s needs in certain elections involving the bond issue and mill levy override."

"That is not true. The district involved the school at every turn, as it was legally required to do," reads the statement.

Also alleged is that the district defied a state board order related to the hiring of an external manager for two schools.

"This is not only false — the district has never defied, and in this case did not defy, a state board order — but the order has nothing to do with PSAS or the district’s oversight of charter schools."

Throughout the network of schools, district leadership and board members "take great pride in the work that we do every day to provide our students, regardless of background or ZIP code, with the excellent education they deserve.

"Our charter schools, PSAS included, are a part of that effort."

It is regretful, the district concludes, that PSAS elected to pursue litigation rather than "sober conversation."

"While misleading or false accusations may sound better on paper than the truth, we will continue to fairly and productively work with the school to ensure that our students get an excellent education. That’s what matters most."

jpompia@chieftain.com

Twitter: @jpompia

Never miss a story

Choose the plan that's right for you.
Digital access or digital and print delivery.